Analogue vs. Digital pt.1

I've never had much of an opinion about recording analog versus digital. I mean it makes sense to me that analog would sound more natural to us. After all, we can't hear 1s and 0s. When I got into recording in high school, I borrowed a bunch of my dad's old analog gear, and eventually I got this little cassette 4-track.

That unit died when I was in college, and a friend and I traded some gear and pitched in on a new one - a Tascam 234 4-track and 106 mixer. Still cassette based, not 1/4" or 1/2", we messed about with it for a couple years, but it was quite challenging. It's amazing to me that recording engineers dealt with tape for so long, and that some would still prefer it. Don't get me wrong, it sounded great. Despite our crappy mics and not really knowing what we were doing, those tapes have a warmth that I still love. But having to keep track of counter numbers, the limitations on track count and having to commit to a mix a few tracks at a time, etc. sometimes made for a frustrating time.

We decided that a computer would be better. I'm not sure what our logic was. I don't think we really thought about digital versus analog at first. I think it was more the ridiculous track counts, unlimited editing capabilities and graphic representation that drew us in. Odd as it may seem, we didn't really consider the sound. We were writing material and recording was recording. And now I've been recording almost exclusively in digital for 10 years because it's just simpler.

The 234 didn't get much use after I bought a computer specifically to use in the little studio/music room we'd built. But I still own it and have carted it around for years for no discernible reason. Recently I read an article about mastering and how some mastering houses still prefer to get the material on 1/2" tape. I was kind of shocked, but it got me thinking about reintegrating analog gear into my computer setup, especially since I've been thinking that my newest project should have a more vintage feel. There are plugins that model classic units and their analog circuitry, but why not just run the music through some real analog circuitry? Or even record it to real analog tape and then re-digitize it?

So, out came the 234. Unfortunately, the tape head doesn't seem to function anymore. Still, I tried plugging my electric guitar as well as a microphone into the 4-track and then patching the outputs to my audio interface, essentially using it as a preamp. I did a bit of tracking, and it worked pretty well. There is definitely a difference in the sound. It's warmer but also a little noisier, perhaps in a good way, and you can't beat the look of this old gear.

Two problems with this method: 1) When mixing these recordings and adding effects, the noise gets enhanced along with the instrument. Not a big deal for 1 or 2 tracks maybe, but beyond that, it really becomes noticeable. And 2) I can only record my guitars and vocals this way. Any electronic or sampled parts don't get the same treatment. I think a better method would be to track and mix digitally, record my final mix to tape, and then record from the tape back to the computer adding any mastering effects at that point for a finalized, release-ready recording. That way I also get the sound of tape as well as the analog circuitry, and the entire mix is treated, not just a few individual parts.

I emailed my dad, and I'm hoping his old TEAC reel-to-reel tape deck from the 60s still works (an attic dweller the last few years unfortunately). Otherwise I'll have to pay to have the 234 repaired (which might cost more than it's worth at this point), or buy a reel-to-reel from craiglist or ebay (there are quite a few available, but any in guaranteed working condition aren't cheap). I've actually been thinking about getting a tube preamp too (the Presonus BlueTube), but we'll see where this goes first...

-TFW

Where does the music stand?

There's a lot of talk about the state of the music industry right now. What happened to the cash cow of the ninties? How do we adapt and become profitable again? Can we stop piracy and illegal file sharing? It seems to me that the biggest problem is that there's a real disconnect between the industry and its audience. Many are running around trying to figure out a profitable delivery method for the same old music - streaming, downloads, ads, subscriptions, clouds, etc. - but the assumption seems to be that the same market is still there. I fear this may not be the case.

The world of music has been split into genre niches. It's true we still have our mainstream acts like Jay-Z and Taylor Swift, but these mainstream artists on major labels aren't bringing in nearly as much profit as they once were. This is often attributed to piracy and file-sharing. While I'll admit that those things have definitely been detrimental to the major label model of the music industry, I don't believe that they are the root cause. Piracy and file-sharing are symptoms of a de-valuation of music in our culture.

Music fans have always been divided into passive and active listeners, but that division is even more striking today. I believe that, in addition to file sharing, another effect of the internet is that it has helped to turn us into a multimedia culture. People have a much greater degree of choice, and it doesn't necessarily mean they're choosing a wider variety of music. In fact, it could be that they're choosing a greater variety of alternatives to musical entertainment. As broadband became commonplace, video became more accessible, and YouTube has turned into a huge hub of online interaction. Video games, especially those played online with other players have become commonplace, and millions of people participate.

As a result of this, the amount of music that is consumed passively has increased exponentially over the last decade. This has a couple of consequences. I think one, and a possible reason music has split into niches, is that the mainstream just doesn't see music as an end unto itself anymore. It's an accompaniment. You're either 1) listening to music, generally on headphones, while you do something else - surf the web, read a book, cook dinner, etc., or 2) music is the soundtrack to your movie, video game, TV show, YouTube clip, etc. Who buys a stereo hi-fi these days? A very small market of audiophiles maybe, but for the mainstream it's all about surround sound which means HD and DVD and Blu-Ray and game consoles. True music fans are few and far between, and because of the mess the major labels have made of their business, the labels have lost credibility with fans, and the fans seek out ever more intimate bands and artists - people they feel they can connect with.

The other consequence is that a lot of really talented musicians don't necessarily see being in a band as the cool thing to do anymore. It's no longer rebellious to rock out when we see 50- and 60-year-olds on stage. I hate to say it, but rock music seems to be gaining "oldies" status. So really good musicians have migrated to soundtrack work - partly because that's where the money is, partly because of the shift toward more electronic and computer based production, and partly because it's way cooler to have your track in a movie or videogame or TV show these days than to have it played on the radio. You have a better chance promoting yourself by being the guy featured on HBO or Call of Duty show than having your record spun on some underground radio show (whetehr terrestrial or satellite) that most people have never heard of.

I just don't think very many people listen to music as an activity anymore. This is especially true of the younger generation, and make no mistake, that's who you need to focus on because the old fogeys, i.e. anyone over 30, are already in the bag having discovered their favorites, bought the albums and collectors sets, etc. MTV started the process - shifting the focus from the auditory to the visual, and video games continued it, pushing music even further into the background. This has led to a situation where musicians aren't the headliner - they're the small print, and therefore, people aren't as inclined to be drawn to a live show to watch their heroes perform amazing feats of musical accomplishment. Right now musicians just aren't megastars. It may cycle back around to that point again, but I'm not sure we're at a place culturally where we, collectively anyway, want to be adoring fans and propel anyone to great heights. The true fans find their niche and want their niche artists to succeed, but the mainstream is on the wane.

Interestingly, as the mainstream has made a psychological shift from active to passive consumption, it's often the reverse for music fans. Sure there are still times where I want to sit and listen to someone else put feelings into words and sounds that I couldn't come up with on my own, but most of the time I want to feel like I'm taking part in something. Have you heard of Dan Deacon? Granted he's got a pretty small niche so probably not, but his shows are interesting because he brings the audience into the inner circle and makes the show about them all doing something together. He paints himself as a facilatator, not a star. You don't worship him, you party with him. That's what the music industry needs to figure out: We don't want to have anything shoved down our throats - we want to be part of the process.

Entertainment needs to become more communal and interactive. Communal doesn't mean a hive where everyone belongs. It's got to be interactive, but still make the consumer feel like an individual, part of an elite group. That's why online gaming and social networking work; the user controls the size of their own network, but yet the technology makes it possible for these small groups to multiply and cross-pollinate. I think the music industry (and the movie, publishing and journalism industries too) need to realize this. And it's not just about using Twitter, Myspace and Facebook to build awareness, though they are useful tools. Those alone barely prop up the old model because internet users are even more savvy regarding advertising than TV viewers have become. The user has control and can ignore you, and it's pretty easy to see through marketing hype online.

If you really want to attract people, it's got to be an entirely new approach. Make the entertainment experience something people in todays world will want to pay for. Maybe the publicity arm moves away from advertising and toward finding ways to create collaborative events. Maybe artist development means more than money for touring and studio time, but helping the entertainer connect with fans. Sadly, I don't have the magic bullet yet - just some thoughts on where we stand, but I think we can come up with the new ideas we need to succeed. It's not about legislating what the fans can and cannot do. It's about bringing them into the fold and giving them a stake in the success of the product.

-TFW

new project new project new project

So I mentioned this briefly a few weeks ago as I closed out my year of songwriting, but let me get into a little more detail. In listening through the plethora of ragged material I generated last year, I found a group of songs that I thought might merit further development into some sort of album-like project. But just writing and recording an album seems so static. I've already been living inside my own head for a year. And since I've enjoyed blogging as well and would like to kep at it, I thought I'd try something a little different.

I've selected 20 tracks (listed below) to explore, and I'm going to document their development. I'll post productions in progress, lyrical drafts, etc. here. In addition, I'm going to experiment with setting up online sessions for each of the pieces where I'll provide a current mix and the core constituent elements, and anyone can either comment on things, or possibly download parts and work on his or her own version.

I'd really like to collaborate with any interested parties. Maybe the sound of a piece will inspire someone else to write words, or perhaps an idea for an instrument or some other missing element that could really make a song soar could some from another person, or maybe a certain track just sucks and people can let me know that it's just not working. So I'm encouraging anyone who hears/reads anything that catches his or her interest, please comment with thoughts and ideas, and we'll see what happens.

I'm also hoping to make these songs and posts more engaging and less technical than my blog was last year. My main frustration with the blog is that I never really felt like my writing about my songs really added to them in any way. I'd like to change that, and I really welcome any any all comments or suggestions about this music. I mean, look, I'm going to keep writing and recording music because, well, I don't really know how to not do that, but I'd like to see what can spring from using music as a medium to interact.

The songs:

Read more...







Meet and Greet

Video: Mastering Your Music: 101

I found this blog this morning via twitter that has lots of good stuff for the musically/technologically inclined. For instance this tutorial Video: Mastering Your Music: 101